Global Warming / Climate Change

It is real !

All the dinosaur farts would of done the same affect but luckily that astaroid put a stop to it.

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/

Yes it was obvious they were going to push this rubbish out

speak to your grandma and they say summers use to be like this every year

But they are fake news

My grandma has pictures from the 50s and she'd always say that was a hot day (blackpool), theres 1000s of pictures from the 50s to the 80s and they are packed with sunny days

Same with lots of pictures you can find from the 50s etc, this would have been a good summer 50 years ago, now its "heatwave"

Amazing how easy it is to fool people

100 years ago you had to wear a full body suit to bathe in the ocean.

It was far too cold for the budgie smugglers.

Where there is money to be made and gullible types it's easy to peddle this tosh. 1976 was obviously not part of global warming. Neither was the ice age. Neither was...........you kinda get the picture!

Think of all these people who work in the climate/weather industry,are they going to say weather/climate is all normal,nothing to see here?no because all their grants/jobs would be made redundant.Turkeys don't vote for christmas.

Summers were hotter in Victorian times than they are now so no,our summers are normally sh1t ffs

Jul 27, 2018 -- 3:56PM, charwell. wrote:

Where there is money to be made and gullible types it's easy to peddle this tosh. 1976 was obviously not part of global warming. Neither was the ice age. Neither was...........you kinda get the picture!

The theory is not "tosh".  The more CO2 there is in the atmosphere, the hotter it gets.  That is a fact.

And amazingly (not) terry, the forumite with the least qualifications, spouts some pish he read on a blog somewhere.

The theory is not "tosh".  The more CO2 there is in the atmosphere, the hotter it gets.  That is a fact.

It is not a FACT. it is a THEORY.

yes, global warming is a fact of course ...but why were Sky and the BBC comparing June 2018 in the UK with 1950-1980  ..what a bag of shyte !!   they should have compared 2010 - 2018   ,not one outstanding month

Go and spend some time on Venus if you think it's a theory

summers worlwide  are hotter , UK has had some poor summers of late ,even in the normally reliably warm south-east of England   ... yearly temps are up in the UK by some distance .

1960s summers  were abysmal - try telling some old timer  ...back then we had a climate similar to the Ukraine/Romania  if you listen to them for  long enough

old people have very selected memories

once again sh1t 4 brains dave,point where ive got anything wrong,still waiting since last time I asked,and you know nothing whatsoever about me so keep it shut son

Question for you dave,this global warming hoax,how many billions is it making for your masters?

I'm sure that drummer (professor cox) will soon be showing his graphs

Like the graph he printed of his computer showing the difference between 2008-2018, where temps have been lower than average until this year.

6 weeks of sunshine for the first time since 2004 and all of a sudden its that climate change again law of averages say we were bound to get a decent summer eventually

We can't even enjoy the sunshine in this country without the media spewing absolute filth

"travelling disruptions because of heatwave"

at least the bees seem to be doing better this year

twice as many bumblebees about

coachbuster - I nose we had some hot dry summers in the 60s

You can't take a one off and use it as proof of global warming, as the silly people on telly seem to be doing..

I'm not saying humans can't affect climate and aren't, BUT if the jet stream is unusually high AND there is a pressure area that both mean we're getting a lot of hot air sucked up from spain/africa this summer, this does not mean the entire world is going to pot.

It's not long ago at all we were having a truly sh1tty summer and the reason given was that the jet stream was unusually low so we were getting cold air dragged down..

Given it's all down to this jet stream being flown badly, I'm actually inclined to blame O'Leary and Ryanair.

Donny I was just thinking that this summer has been good for insects. I was looking at plants and they were full of aphids and ladybirds in particular, gobbling them up.

Huge amounts of what might be ants as well. It's like there has been multiple "ant days" this year?

Jul 27, 2018 -- 6:55PM, terry mccann wrote:

once again sh1t 4 brains dave,point where ive got anything wrong,still waiting since last time I asked,and you know nothing whatsoever about me so keep it shut son

you get everything wrong, you are the most ignorant man I've ever encountered.  Sometimes I think you must just be a "character", if so that is even sadder if possible.

Still haven't seen many bees though, just checking

If I see a bee nowadays I don't fling my hands around, I'll let it buzz round and let it go, I miss bees

its the ruskies

i haven't noticed many bees this year

they are all on my lavender ....having visited lupins, foxgloves and still enjoying hollyhocks too

loads of white butterflies, grasshoppers, and black ants

not many lady birds, nor brown/ rec butterflies


birds have mainly left for woods now too

brown/ red butterflies

good to know donny ...thought  the populations were down

GERMANY today broke it's all time temperature record


https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=hottest+germany+temperature&oq=hottest+ger...

40.3  in case you're wondering

knew it had to be pretty close when i saw Essen temperature at 37 earlier 

hottest night ever in the NETHERLANDS  23.6

hottest EVER DAY TODAY in BELGIUM

https://www.expatica.com/be/news/country-news/Hottest-day-ever-measured-in-B...

38.2 ...that's a bit lower than ours which is weird really  ...why doesn't Belgium get more heat is the question  ? London is warmer than inland Brussels in summer

Great answer TROLLBOY,once again what have I got wrong

Coach, the Bee population is way down, never see any here,when I go into the garden its eerie as there is vitually no insert noise at all

some weather stations tend to get hotter because of amount of
concrete and tarmac around them, such as airports

just popped out to see if there was a break in the clouds...there isnt

but found my first garden frog of summer..enjoying the rain and slugs....

terry , is that nationwide ?  ...i havent see many bees at all ... i have planted so many bee and butterfly loving plants ...thought the dry weather might be responsible

hedgehogs still coming round for water these last few nights  and  frogs too donny around ...

Nice to see you know what is going on donny, a certain amount of weather stations were placed near airports or urban areas.

I dont know whether global warming is occurring, but i feel man has very little to do with it.

Well apart from cutting forests down.

I have enjoyed a lot of butterfly's and Bees so far.

we stopped burning all them fuels that pumped out smoke

the smoke would have helped keep temps down

wheras co2 helps increase temps

and is still being produced..but more often via smokeless fuel



memory from school was that it was hard to test for co2

co2 turns lime water milky?


best wat to take co2 from atmosphere is to grow more plants


one day co2 capture may be possible on large scale ...but without
being able to make monets from the process its not top of the list.

more plants automatically grow when there is more co2 , so that’s a good thing

It might be wise to stock up on veg , cereals and sugar as crops are failing .

deforestation has been the major problem imo. forests absorb large amounts of co2, in one year, an acre of forest
can absorb twice the co2 produced by the average car's annual mileage, and produce large amounts
of o2, One large tree can supply a day's supply of oxygen for four people.

Between 2000 and 2012 890,000 sq miles of forests around the world were cut down. As a result of deforestation,
only 2.4 million square miles remained of the original 6 million square miles of forest that formerly covered the Earth.

To put that into context, 890 000 sq mi is 569 600 000 acres so that could have absorbed the co2 of
around one billion one hundred and thirty nine million two hundred thousand cars.
As it is about 30% of all carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels are absorbed by forests alone.

Even for those that are rightly arguing the earth has natural warming and cooling cycles the added impact of this isn't
a difficult equation to figure out.

Every minute an area the size of a football pitch is cleared in the amazon, and that is a significant decline on previous
rates, and there are many schemes to reforest areas in many parts of the world they can still never keep up with the rate of
deforestation.

Just another way to tax people that's all.

Polar bear numbers on the increase

Go and spend some time on Venus if you think it's a theory

Not that one again.

You can't use Venus as a comparison with Earth. The temperature on Venus is down to its atmospheric pressure being 92 times that of our planet. It's the density of its atmosphere which reduces the lapse rate (the rate of decline of temperature with altitude) to a fraction of that on Earth. The actual composition of the atmosphere makes virtually no difference. It happens to consist mostly of carbon dioxide, but the effect would be the same if it were mostly nitrogen, as on Earth.

The runaway greenhouse effect on Venus is just one of Carl Sagan's entertaining ideas which turned out not to be the case in reality (nuclear winter is another one of his). But because it suits a lot of agendas, it's been seized upon and treated as a fact to frighten the gullible.

If you're not convinced, consider the fact that the greenhouse effect consists of long-wave sunlight being reflected back from a planet's surface at a shorter wavelength and trapped by the atmosphere. But the atmosphere on Venus is so thick that only a small amount of sunlight actually reaches the surface in the first place. The evidence for that is the fact that the daytime temperature is virtually the same as the one at night. So how can there be a greenhouse effect from the sun's warmth, if so little of the sun's warmth actually reaches the surface?

Anyone else get cellar spiders in summer? My freakin' house gets overrun. Never kill spiders but I have no choice with these f!ckers, must take out about five on average a day

Its not as hot as they tell you its the "Urban Heat Island Effect"

Records go back 350 years and shows june 2018 was only the 18th warmest,the warmest being 1847

Mankind is destroying this wonderful Planet.

Jul 29, 2018 -- 10:30PM, terry mccann wrote:

Its not as hot as they tell you its the "Urban Heat Island Effect"

i assume by "they" you mean climatologist's, the people that first noted UHI by and monitor it?
So you believe them on UHI but not about any of the other findings on global warming?
You do know UHI is factored in to overall data and most data is taken away from urban areas with UHI
being a study in its own right?

screaming from beneaththewaves • July 29, 2018 8:06 PM BST

The actual composition of the atmosphere makes virtually no difference. It happens to consist mostly of carbon dioxide, but the effect would be the same if it were mostly nitrogen, as on Earth

Just to be sure that I understand your thinking, you believe that the denseness of Venus's atmosphere has nothing to do with it's composition?

For crying out loud, how hard can it be to learn when to use it's and when to use its?

You demand people on here educate you when your English teacher, who presumably was being paid for his efforts, found it beyond him.

I don't know about screamingfrombeneaththewaves, but I find it very difficult being sneered at by halfwits.

The density of carbon dioxide is 1.98 kg/cubic metre, while the density of air on Earth at sea level is about 1.2 kg/cubic metre.

You could replace earth's entire atmosphere with carbon dioxide, and atmospheric pressure would only be about 1.7 times greater. A far cry from Venus, where atmospheric pressure is 92 times greater.

In other words, the ridiculously high atmospheric pressure on Venus, which results in a surface temperature of 460 C, has nothing to do with the composition of the atmosphere, whether it's carbon dioxide or otherwise, but simply the fact that there's so much of it squeezed onto a planet the same size as ours.

Jul 30, 2018 -- 9:29AM, jed.davison wrote:

For crying out loud, how hard can it be to learn when to use it's and when to use its?You demand people on here educate you when your English teacher, who presumably was being paid for his efforts, found it beyond him.I don't know about screamingfrombeneaththewaves, but I find it very difficult being sneered at by halfwits.

nice bit of trolling.

@ sbtw

Fair point but it's unlikely that Venus started with that atmosphere as it is so different from earth and similar in size.  And in any case it is indisputable that an earth with a carbon dioxide atmosphere would be far hotter.

Talking about how temps are taken North

Earth's atmosphere consists of just 0.041% carbon dioxide. The scare is because it's risen from 0.028% in pre-industrial times! Never mind the chemistry, there simply isn't enough carbon on the planet for Earth to have a "carbon dioxide atmosphere".

In recent geologic time carbon dioxide levels rose to a high of 0.195% of the atmosphere in the Jurassic period (five times current levels). Temperatures are estimated to have been just 3C higher than today, with no ice at either Pole, and life naturally flourished as a consequence. Whether that higher temperature is down to CO2 is impossible to say, as the layout of landmasses, the earth's tilt, and tectonic activity, were so different then.

If there's any real danger it's that we recently flirted so close to the low level of carbon dioxide at which life becomes impossible (estimated to be 0.018% of the atmosphere). And, of course, that the current interglacial is so fragile that there's permanent ice at both poles - a very rare event.

Of course there's a greenhouse gas effect on Earth, but it's down to water vapour in the atmosphere. Not only does the proportion of water vapour in the atmosphere vastly outweigh that of carbon dioxide (it can be as much as 4% over the tropical oceans), but it also absorbs reflected sunlight at a greater range of wavelengths than carbon dioxide.

Any effect of additional carbon dioxide on temperature would be too small to notice, as nearly all the reflected sunlight which could be trapped at the wavelengths at which carbon dioxide is effective is already trapped by the water vapour and the CO2 already in the atmosphere.

^ that is straight out the climate change deniers handbook. i mean if that is the half science you want to believe
that is up to you. it totally ignores the fact that increased temperatures increase water vapour in the first place.
A little extra co2 increases temps which increase water vapour levels and you have a cycle that feeds itself.
It is somewhat typical of sceptics to take snippets of the science and present them in an utterly spurious half explained way.

The factor to consider is that water is evaporated from the land and sea and falls as rain or snow all the time.
Thus the amount held in the atmosphere as water vapour varies greatly in just hours and days as result of the weather
in any location. So even though water vapour is the greatest greenhouse gas, it is relatively short-lived.

On the other hand, CO2 is removed from the air by natural geological-scale processes and these take a long time to work.
Consequently CO2 stays in our atmosphere for years and even centuries. A small additional amount has a much more long-term effect.

How it works guys, They break the golden rule that such thermometers MUST NOT  be placed near heat-retaining strutures or surfaces such as the centre of large cities,near airport runways or on tarmac car parks.This is because their readings are then distoacted by the so called Urban etc which can exaggerate temps by up to 2 degrees celsius or more.

If you want to debate, northanlite, don't use that horrible word 'denier'.

You know what it implies, and anyone conflating discussion of the weather with mass murder is impossible to engage with.

i didn't say you were necessarily a denier but there are and they don't debate they just deny any of the science.
the water vapour defence is straight out of their playbook.

Giving false readings to support the multi billion Climate Change hoax Industry is about on par with all the other crap that goes on

thing is terry if we were being told the climate is stable i am pretty damn sure you
would be quoting the available data and telling us we are being lied to.
you just seem to want to believe everything is a hoax or a cover up. you don't seem
to have any filter at all.

Northanlite: There are always going to be people who take issue with your interpretation of how weather works: it's a non-linear system, so there will always be room for debate over which factors are predominating in different times and at different places.

But if your reaction to those people who take issue with you is to label their views as equivalent to those of Holocaust deniers, then you're going to be forever stuck in your current position: shouting that you know you must be right, and unable to grasp why the world is taking no notice of your concerns.

oh stfu where did i mention the holocaust??? also they are not "my concerns" and i would say much of the world
is taking significant notice.

You know where the phrase 'climate change deniers' came from, and why.

The world isn't taking significant notice of your concerns. If it were, you wouldn't have to be broadcasting them so angrily.

And telling people to stfu isn't the way to convince them that your concerns have merit.

I haven't got the technical knowledge darren,

But let me tell you it's getting hot in here!

The climate change deniers might as well be Luddite Flat Earthers! America almost deserves its' forest fires. Have America pulled out of the Kyoto Agreement because they are paying too much, the Earth is not warming up or it is a vote winner for Chump?

They are morons. At times over two thirds of America is 100F. I mean WTF! It is HOT.

I am not saying climate change is caused by human behaviour. I don't know and even if I did I couldn't prove it but the World is getting warmer and digging for coal in vote winning areas of America is good for winning votes short term and nothing else!

The Earth gets hot, cools down, gets cold. We may be in a hot cycle but to deny the World is getting warmer is insane in the brain! insane in the membrane!

Jul 30, 2018 -- 5:23PM, screaming from beneaththewaves wrote:

You know where the phrase 'climate change deniers' came from, and why.The world isn't taking significant notice of your concerns. If it were, you wouldn't have to be broadcasting them so angrily.And telling people to stfu isn't the way to convince them that your concerns have merit.

what utter garbage, and pompous garbage at that. i think you will find the term denial or denier has been around
considerably longer than the event you allude to.

I don't think anyone disagrees there are natural climate cycles just how much the current warming one is
being exacerbate by human activity.
Even those that all agree can't agree to what extent.

I think a lot of climatologists are a bit like a doctor with an obese patient. They might tell them that
if they don't change their lifestyle they could be dead within 2 years but they don't really mean that.
It is a possibility but it is the very very worst case scenario and said in the hope the patient will take
drastic action.

The first good summer since 2003 and its c/c, get a grip lads for gawd sakes

Terry I think you must have been hiding under a mushroom. The World is getting hot! The Ice is melting, sea levels are rising. I don't know what will happen or if it will correct itself as such but America is burning hot.

i'm really surprised that terry would side with the likes of Exxon Mobil, BP, Halliburton et al over
the vast majority of climatologists (basically all those not employed by the fossil fuel industry) who are
all in on some massive hoax. Once again it is a hell of a hoax he is buying in to, even the Chinese are in on it.

One of the really strange myths is that climate scientists are perpetuating this hoax because they are on some
sort of gravy train with massive budgets and huge wages. Well guess what they would be doing if the earth was
cooling or even if it seemed stable for now? They would still be studying the climate and would still be getting
funded to do so because having an understanding of it kind of matters.

Do you seriously think they have a greater vested interest than multi national energy companies?
Who do you honestly think is more likely to pedal falsehoods and misinformation?

America is always very hot in the summer,nothing new, but those fires are terrible and mighty odd